To Burn or Not to Burn
Hello. Temple and Effigy Co-Lead and all-round over-thinker, here.
While we fully intend to set this year's Temple and Effigy ablaze (in part because I have neither the money nor space to store materials), I think it would be good for us to discuss whether we want to make the burning of a temple and effigy a part of Burning Nest in the future.
While I think we can all agree that the carbon released into the atmosphere by our wee Burn is, in relative terms, pretty teeny, especially compared to much bigger global contributors, there is a question, for me, about whether we should unnecessarily be releasing any carbon into the atmosphere as a result of our event. Carbon released from burning wood is, in relative terms, very high (wood, growing over decades by absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, stores a lot of carbon). And not burning the Temple and Effigy is a pretty straight-forward way that we could avoid doing that.
Some other points: I love the symbolism of the Burn. I love the somewhat nihilist destruction of it, the silly, primate awe and wonder of it, and the message it communicates about material transience (more important than ever, I think, in the face of our extinction).
But on the other hand, perhaps there are other ways to communicate these ideas and feelings without actually destroying nature so viscerally and literally.
Other regional Burns don't always burn their Temples and Effigies. I believe the Temple from AfrikaBurn will be going on tour, to engage local communities in Burner culture and to encourage young people in particular to engage in creative expression. By not burning their Temple, AfrikaBurn can also make more colourful, more participatory structures, as well as saving money and resources year on year by having the option of repurposing materials from previous years' structures.
I'd like to hear people's views on this below, including what the Burn means to you, how integral it is to you for a Burn event (and for Nest in particular), what alternatives there might be to burning our Temple and Effigy, and so on.
And yes, I'm fully aware of the potential irony and hypocrisy that the person who proposed and is co-creating the biggest Temple that Nest has ever burned, is also questioning the burning of the Temple and Effigy. If you're surprised by this, then you probably haven't met me. Hi.
Fran Ellis Mon 8 Apr 2019 1:56PM
Totally agree with Lexy and Yon that the impact of the burn is minimal compared to the myriad other ways we could improve our environmental footprint.
And a review sounds great - @graememcgregor1 we could start a thread and review as a community through Loomio on a rolling basis, perhaps collating it all into 'advice' for future burns?
Graeme McGregor Mon 8 Apr 2019 2:08PM
I'd be very up for being involved in this, but I will have to wait until after Nest as I've got too much going on til then.
Fran Ellis Mon 8 Apr 2019 3:06PM
Started a thread just to get a discussion going for now https://www.loomio.org/d/7ZvtoDQ4/reviewing-our-environmental-impact
xavier dubruille Mon 8 Apr 2019 6:36PM
i ll put my voice in the burn side, especially the temple actually.
because burning stuff is primal cf lhe bonfire all troughout the age but for the temple especially, because the temple is full of writing dedicated to dear friends and/or family who passed away and cannot be there to enjoy the shennanigan wee re doing. so burning the temple is burning the message and spread all these message to the atmosphere (or heaven depending of your level of faith) if we have to keep it, all these message will rot in a container which is a waste.....
After to have some structure in metal not burnable and have people fill the sculpture with message on small wood/paper that is another discussion
Bess Wed 10 Apr 2019 10:27AM
I've honestly wondered how the burning of 64 doors is going to work: in terms of combustability, additional material to act as accellerant & fuse, - has the option of dismantling and not burning the outer layer of the temple design, and burning the central section been considered?
I think burning for ritual is worthwhile, but that the resource intensity of designs is worth taking into account: having a bigger is better and each year must be bigger than the previous would be rubbish.
Graeme McGregor Wed 10 Apr 2019 3:01PM
I agree, but no one is proposing to make the Temple bigger every year. It's bigger this year, because that's part of the design and central concept (it wouldn't be much of a labryrinth with only one layer. Three layers deep was the minimal design).
Quick note and not wanting to sound like a dick: If you want to be involved in the Temple & Effigy designs and discussions, plans, etc, then feel free to join the Temple & Effigy Facebook group and take up a volunteer role within it. You'd honestly be super welcome. Sorry if you've already joined the FB group; there's a lot of people in it now but only some are actively contributing.
Re: this year's Temple (and not wanting to get into a big discussion about the pros and cons of the design), we are discussing how to manage the Burn and we have a few different options at this point that we're weighing up. In a nutshell, those are:
- Burn the whole thing, as it stands, using accelerants, "burlap bombs", etc.
- Take the doors off and stack them around a central pyre, but leave the frame structure intact, with some accelerant added to it, so that there is a grid of fire around the central pyre. Could look pretty cool.
- Dismantle the whole thing and pile it up in a big bonfire and burn it.
I'd rather not do the latter because, visually, it's dull and seems a shame to me. At this point, it's most likely we'll go with option two.
Saving the doors isn't really an option as neither I, nor the Temple Team, have the time, money, energy, storage space or transport to store 60+ wooden doors in the hope that they can be resold or repurposed later. And, as noted, there's some strong support for having a Temple Burn as a central part of Nest.
Amandasm Fri 12 Apr 2019 2:28PM
Adopt-a-door policy? Perhaps a few doors could scavenged if someone is willing to take responsibility to take them home? Even with way less doors it will still be a big, cathartic fire. Just throwing it out there..
Graeme McGregor Fri 12 Apr 2019 2:38PM
Honestly, I really don't have the transport, space etc to deal with any unclaimed doors. It seems likely that if people "adopt" a door then they may not then want to or be able to collect it at the end of Nest, for all kinds of reasons. Unless they could then go into the on-site storage for a year, I can't take them with me. Some of them weigh a tonne. And, tbh, I have so much to do to make this happen at all, I don't really know if I have the time or energy to photograph or describe each door and then sort out a system for people to adopt one and take it with them when they leave. And for the amount of wood we would save as a result and the emissions we wouldn't release as a result, it really doesn't seem worth it. x
Ashley Wed 10 Apr 2019 4:25PM
I see the temple/effigy/art burning as being an expression of samsara - the cycle of creation and recreation - like a mandala that you painstakingly create and then destroy to highlight and meditate on the impermanence of all things. In the grand scheme of human endeavour the time and cost to create 60 doors is pretty small, the environmental cost of burning them is tiny (especially held against the rampant and vast industrial world we have devised) - but the value of building and burning to be observed by conscious beings who can take inspiration and enlightenment from the experience, and reflect on that and take those ideas back into the world to effect change, is potentially vast. Burn it in place, as a whole thing, a temporary, beautiful, intangible moment in time. If we're going to have a party to celebrate existing in the present moment we may as well.
Lexy · Mon 8 Apr 2019 2:41PM
And I wrote this before I read @yon1 's above ... Great minds think alike hey Yon ;)